Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville History Capstone Research Papers Senior Capstone Papers 4-28-2015 President Kennedy and the Escalation of the Vietnam War Kenneth L. Sterner Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/history_capstones Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Sterner, Kenneth L., "President Kennedy and the Escalation of the Vietnam War" (2015). History Capstone Research Papers. 1. http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/history_capstones/1 This Capstone Project is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Capstone Research Papers by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sterner, Page 1 Kennedy Responsible: Vietnam By: Kenneth Sterner Senior Thesis 4/23/2015 Sterner, Page 2 Table of Contents 1) Introduction A) Literature Review B) Thesis 2) Historical Context A) President Truman’s Role B) President Eisenhower’s Role C) President Kennedy’s Role D) President Johnson’s Role E) The Impact of President Eisenhower 3) Main Argument A) Kennedy’s Removal of President Diem B) Diem and the Political Stability of South Vietnam. 1954-1963 C) The Political Instability of South Vietnam after Diem. 1963-1965 D) Kennedy, Diem, and the Success of the Vietnam War. 1960-1963 E) The War in South Vietnam after Diem. 1963-1965. F) President Diem and the Economics of South Vietnam. 1954-1968. 4) Hesitation, or Personality? 5) Conclusion Sterner, Page 3 Map of Vietnam Sterner, Page 4 Map of North and South Vietnam Sterner, Page 5 Ngo Dinh Diem Sterner, Page 6 Section 1: Introduction In nearly 250 years of existence, the United States has rarely faced an opponent that was able to match, let alone defeat, its superior military capabilities. The conflict in Vietnam is one of the rare instances in time where a significantly weaker faction was able to resist the strength of America’s political, military, and economic superiority. When American disdain for the war reached its peak in the late 1960’s, many people blamed President Lyndon B. Johnson’s ‘Great Escalation’ for involving the U.S in a protracted, unwinnable war. As several government documents became declassified in the 1990’s many historians became convinced that President Eisenhower’s “Hidden Hand” presidency placed America on the path toward involvement in Vietnam. David L. Anderson, author of Trapped by Success, The Eisenhower Administration and Vietnam, represents those historians showing President Eisenhower’s path to Vietnam. Anderson does this by arguing Eisenhower supported a flailing South Vietnamese government with economic and military programs. Economic programs, such as the Commercial Import Program, supported a South Vietnamese economy that otherwise would have collapsed. 1 The Military Assistance Group (MAAG) and Temporary Equipment Recovery Mission (TERM) supported a South Vietnamese army that was weak and ineffective. Finally, David Anderson argues that President Eisenhower’s decision to create and sign the South East Asia Treaty Organization, SEATO, would force future presidents into the Vietnam conflict and act as a basis for U.S escalation. 2 While many historians place the burden of guilt on President Eisenhower or Johnson, some claim that President John F. Kennedy should be held responsible. William J. Rust, author 1 David Anderson, Trapped by Success: The Eisenhower Administration and Vietnam 1953-1961, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), 49-50 2 Anderson, 117 Sterner, Page 7 of Kennedy in Vietnam, American Foreign Policy from 1960-1963, argues that President Kennedy’s policies drew America into the Vietnam War. William Rust argues that the Counter Insurgency and Strategic Hamlet plan were programs that attempted to take power and decision making out of the hands of the South Vietnamese government, ultimately creating a government that was reliant on United States support. 3 Rust also argues that President Kennedy’s introduction of four hundred Green Berets, authorization of several joint U.S-Vietnamese missions, growth of the South Vietnamese army, and escalation of military advisers to over sixteen thousand placed America in a position where it could not withdraw from Vietnam, ultimately forcing Johnson into the conflict. 4 Finally, some historians continue to claim that President Lyndon Johnson remains the primary reason America entered the Vietnam conflict. Michael H. Hunt, author of Lyndon Johnson’s War, America’s Cold War Crusade in Vietnam, 1945-1968 , argues that even though Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy’s use of aid to South Vietnam placed Johnson in a difficult position, Johnson made three steps of his own to escalate the war. First, Johnson used tough rhetoric and more American aid to try and halt North Vietnam from escalating the war. Hunt quotes several of President Johnson’s speeches and escalation of advisers in 1964 as a ‘soft’ escalation. 5 With this type of escalation not working, President Johnson moved onto bombing campaigns in order to win the conflict. Michael Hunt argues that Operation “Rolling Thunder,” an extensive bombing campaign authorized on March 8 th , was designed to bomb North Vietnam into submission. 6 With Operation Rolling Thunder dealing substantial damage, but not ending 3 William Rust, Kennedy in Vietnam: American Foreign Policy from 1960 to 1963, (New York: Da Capo Press, 1985), page 50-51 4 Rust, 181 5 Michael Hunt, Lyndon Johnson’s War: America’s Cold War Crusade in Vietnam, 1945-1968, (New York: Hill and Wang, 1996), 80-85 6 Hunt, 92 Sterner, Page 8 the conflict, Johnson made the last decision available to him. After failing to end the war through threats and bombing, Johnson committed American troops into South Vietnam in what fully committed the U.S to the Vietnam Conflict. 7 While the previous historians make valid points in their examination of responsibility for the Vietnam War, no single author is correct. Author David Anderson rightly places a large portion of blame on President Eisenhower for starting the war, but does not acknowledge the impact of President Kennedy. Rust’s arguments correctly place a large portion of blame on President Kennedy, but are unconvincing when viewing the antagonism between the U.S and South Vietnam. Hunt does a fair job explaining that Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy laid a foundation for President Johnson, but writes as if President Johnson had a choose to escalate the war. This paper will show that President Kennedy’s decision to remove Ngo Dinh Diem as President of South Vietnam placed him as the decisive President that forced the U.S into the Vietnam conflict. Section 2: Historical Context In order to properly examine President Kennedy’s intervention in the Vietnam conflict, it is important to establish historical context for America’s involvement. U.S intervention in Vietnam can be traced back to President Harry Truman’s support for the French during the early 1950’s. Although Vietnam did not exist as a sovereign state during this time, since France regarded the entire Indochina region as a single colony, the people in Vietnam fervently believed they were a unique nationality. The U.S.S.R, wanting to create a bastion of Communism in Asia, supported revolutionary groups seeking to free themselves from French Colonialism, such as the 7 Hunt, 98 Sterner, Page 9 Viet Minh. With the U.S and U.S.S.R struggling for dominance in the early years of the cold war, the U.S supported its ally France in the region. Truman believed the French forces in the region were acting as a substitute for American troops; his commitment of more than twenty three and a half million dollars to the French war effort withheld the need for American troops in the region. As 1950’s progressed, and despite Truman’s economic aid, the French had spent more than one trillion Francs and been unable to win the war. 8 After years of fighting to maintain its colonial empire, France surrendered its right to govern Southeast Asia when it signed the Geneva Agreements on July 20 th , 1954. These agreements created several nations in the Indochina region, ranging from Laos, to Cambodia, to North and South Vietnam. The Viet-Minh, who were unhappy with the creation of a North and South Vietnam, agreed to the accords because France assured unifying elections in 1956 if the Viet Minh halted hostilities against South Vietnam. 9 President Eisenhower refused to acknowledge the Geneva Agreements because of continued Viet Minh attacks against South Vietnam, as well as the absence of a plan to implement U.N oversight of the unifying elections. Because the Viet Minh attacks originated from North Vietnam, and South Vietnam being attacked for being democratic, President Eisenhower started to supply South Vietnam with a small amount of economic and military aid. 10 As justification for the aid, President Eisenhower introduced the Domino theory. The Domino Theory, first mentioned on April 7 th , 1954, argued that if one country in Southeast Asia fell to 8 “The Tangled Web: America, France and Indochina 1947-50,” HistoryToday, last modified January 1, 2012, accessed April 2, 2015, http://www.historytoday.com/sami-abouzahr/tangled-web-america-france-and-indochina- 1947-50 9 “Indochina - Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities in Viet-Nam, July 20, 1954,” Lillian Goldman Law Library , last modified January 1 , 2008, accessed January 18 th , 2015, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/inch001.asp#1 10 “Vietnam War, Part I – The Geneva Accords,” History Half , last modified October 3, 2010, accessed January 24, 2015, http://historyhalf.com/vietnam-war-part-i-the-geneva-accords/ Sterner, Page 10 Communism, all nearby countries would as well. In 1955 Ngo Dinh Diem, a staunch critic of Communism, gained power in South Vietnam and promised to combat the Viet Minh, who were continuing their terror attacks on South Vietnam in order to scare the population into accepting Communism.